<meta-comment> I like to be personally CC'ed on mails here, and I assume arbitrarily everyone else is like me. If you don't want to be CC'ed, please mention it personally. </meta-comment> On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > which uses the above slot after testing the tp_flag setting. > > > Python instances, lists, tuples should then support this new > > > slot. We could even sneak in support for dictionaries once we > > > decide whether semantics whould be > > > > Bait! > > Yuck. The same argument for disallowing 'x in dict' applies to the C > API. There's already PyMapping_HasKey(). I totally agree with Guido -- for me, the whole point of this hack is to avoid people asking for 'in' in dicts: this way we can code a class 'set' (as I've demonstrated), and have rational semantics to 'in' which is just as efficient as 'dict.has_key'. I'm not quite sure where we want to put the C API version of __contains__ - I'd add a tp_as_set, but the only method seems to be 'in', so it seems like a waste of valuable real-estate before we are driven into non-backwards-compatability. I think I should at least ask permission from the owner before I move over there, trampling everything in my way<wink> What does everyone think about that? -- Moshe Zadka <mzadka@geocities.com>. INTERNET: Learn what you know. Share what you don't.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4